Oakland Raiders fan Matt Gutierrez of Nevada waves a Raiders flag in front of the Welcome to Fabulous Las Vegas sign after National Football League owners voted 31-1 to approve the team's application to relocate to Las Vegas during their annual meeting on March 27, 2017, in Las Vegas.

Oakland filed a lawsuit in federal court Tuesday challenging the relocation of the Raiders to Las Vegas, calling the move illegal and demanding compensation for hundreds of millions of dollars in losses.The long-awaited suit seeks damages for the “unlawful decision to boycott Oakland” but does not ask for the team to remain in the city. Defendants include the National Football League and each of its 32 teams. The city claims the NFL and its teams collude together as an “illegal cartel” to demand that cities such as Oakland bankroll new stadiums with public funds or else be shut out of the marketplace with team relocations.On top of antitrust violations, the complaint alleges that the Raiders and NFL breached their contract with the city.“The Raiders’ illegal move lines the pockets of NFL owners and sticks Oakland, its residents, taxpayers and dedicated fans with the bill,” City Attorney Barbara Parker said in a statement. “The purpose of this lawsuit is to hold the defendants accountable and help to compensate Oakland for the damages the defendants’ unlawful actions have caused and will cause to the people of Oakland.”Representatives of the Raiders and NFL did not immediately return requests for comment.The city says league officials negotiated in bad faith and did not give serious consideration to its counteroffer to build a new stadium using a mix of public and private funds. The 45-page complaint alleges that a $378 million relocation fee paid by the Raiders enriched the 31 other clubs and thus “skewed the bidding process.”The suit notes that Raiders owner Mark Davis was among the beneficiaries of relocation fees paid by the Rams and Chargers and alleges that none of the money actually goes toward relocation-related expenses.“The NFL’s approval of the Raiders’ relocation — and its approval of the relocations of the Rams and Chargers as well — is a classic act of a cartel misusing market power to achieve monopolistic cartel payments and generating anticompetitive profits,” the suit says.“By forcing host cities to choose between paying those monopolistic cartel payments — which far exceed the marginal costs of operating a professional football team — and losing the football team their citizens cherish, the NFL places host cities in a Hobson’s choice that all consumers of monopolistic goods and services face: pay up, way up, or lose.”Oakland is seeking triple damages from the Raiders and the NFL at trial but did not put a number on the amount. The city “invested and borrowed significant sums of money, totaling over $240 million” in the expectation that the Raiders would stay in the city and at the Oakland Coliseum, the suit claims.And while Raiders games actually cost Oakland and Alameda County more than they bring in — due to expenses such as law enforcement and converting the field between football and baseball uses — the complaint says the city will lose money when the team leaves because of tax revenue and economic activity the Raiders generate.Among the remedies Oakland’s suit is seeking is “disgorgement” — the repayment of illegally obtained profits.The city tapped outside law firms Berg & Androphy and Pearson, Simon & Warshaw to work on the lawsuit on a contingency basis, meaning they won’t get paid unless they win.If Oakland succeeds, which some legal experts think is unlikely, any ruling could impact how other host cities are treated during stadium and relocation fights. The suit argues that the NFL is illegally leveraging its monopoly power, which results in “an anticompetitive wealth transfer from municipalities to private business.”The City Council voted to authorize the suit in July. In response, the Raiders threatened to leave Oakland sooner than expected. The team and joint city-county board that oversees the Coliseum sports complex have been unable to reach a new lease agreement with the specter of litigation hanging over them.The Raiders are not slated to move to Las Vegas until 2020, so where they play for the 2019 season remains unclear.Kimberly Veklerov is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Twitter: @kveklerov

The long-awaited suit seeks damages for the “unlawful decision to boycott Oakland” but does not ask for the team to remain in the city. Defendants include the National Football League and each of its 32 teams. The city claims the NFL and its teams collude together as an “illegal cartel” to demand that cities such as Oakland bankroll new stadiums with public funds or else be shut out of the marketplace with team relocations.

Advertisement

On top of antitrust violations, the complaint alleges that the Raiders and NFL breached their contract with the city.

“The Raiders’ illegal move lines the pockets of NFL owners and sticks Oakland, its residents, taxpayers and dedicated fans with the bill,” City Attorney Barbara Parker said in a statement. “The purpose of this lawsuit is to hold the defendants accountable and help to compensate Oakland for the damages the defendants’ unlawful actions have caused and will cause to the people of Oakland.”

Representatives of the Raiders and NFL did not immediately return requests for comment.

The city says league officials negotiated in bad faith and did not give serious consideration to its counteroffer to build a new stadium using a mix of public and private funds. The 45-page complaint alleges that a $378 million relocation fee paid by the Raiders enriched the 31 other clubs and thus “skewed the bidding process.”

The suit notes that Raiders owner Mark Davis was among the beneficiaries of relocation fees paid by the Rams and Chargers and alleges that none of the money actually goes toward relocation-related expenses.

“The NFL’s approval of the Raiders’ relocation — and its approval of the relocations of the Rams and Chargers as well — is a classic act of a cartel misusing market power to achieve monopolistic cartel payments and generating anticompetitive profits,” the suit says.

“By forcing host cities to choose between paying those monopolistic cartel payments — which far exceed the marginal costs of operating a professional football team — and losing the football team their citizens cherish, the NFL places host cities in a Hobson’s choice that all consumers of monopolistic goods and services face: pay up, way up, or lose.”

Oakland is seeking triple damages from the Raiders and the NFL at trial but did not put a number on the amount. The city “invested and borrowed significant sums of money, totaling over $240 million” in the expectation that the Raiders would stay in the city and at the Oakland Coliseum, the suit claims.

And while Raiders games actually cost Oakland and Alameda County more than they bring in — due to expenses such as law enforcement and converting the field between football and baseball uses — the complaint says the city will lose money when the team leaves because of tax revenue and economic activity the Raiders generate.

Among the remedies Oakland’s suit is seeking is “disgorgement” — the repayment of illegally obtained profits.

The city tapped outside law firms Berg & Androphy and Pearson, Simon & Warshaw to work on the lawsuit on a contingency basis, meaning they won’t get paid unless they win.

If Oakland succeeds, which some legal experts think is unlikely, any ruling could impact how other host cities are treated during stadium and relocation fights. The suit argues that the NFL is illegally leveraging its monopoly power, which results in “an anticompetitive wealth transfer from municipalities to private business.”

The City Council voted to authorize the suit in July. In response, the Raiders threatened to leave Oakland sooner than expected. The team and joint city-county board that oversees the Coliseum sports complex have been unable to reach a new lease agreement with the specter of litigation hanging over them.

The Raiders are not slated to move to Las Vegas until 2020, so where they play for the 2019 season remains unclear.